aiworkhub_agent_tool_instruction_preview

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must carry the behavioral burden. It usefully states the repository-root binding behavior and the MCP/CLI scope difference, but it does not explicitly say whether the preview is read-only, has side effects, or requires permissions.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is concise and front-loads the MCP-bound scope. The CLI comparison sentence is somewhat tangential but still reinforces the repository-root constraint rather than obscuring the main point.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Because an output schema exists, return values need not be described. However, for an instruction-preview tool with no annotations, the definition should more clearly state what preview means and when it should be chosen over inspect/apply.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The description adds important meaning beyond the schema by clarifying that `provider` is an instruction-file target, not a model provider, and by pointing to the schema for valid filenames. It does not explain the default/null behavior when `provider` is omitted, but it materially improves interpretation of the sole parameter.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description implies a preview operation tied to instruction-file targets, but it never plainly states what is being previewed or what the tool returns. It also lacks explicit differentiation from sibling tools `aiworkhub_agent_tool_instruction_inspect` and `aiworkhub_agent_tool_instruction_apply`.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

There is no guidance on when to use preview versus inspect or apply, and no preconditions such as when to call it before applying changes. The MCP/CLI repository-root distinction is useful context but not usage guidance for the MCP agent.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.